Skepticism

EVENTS

Did anyone attend The Paradigm Symposium?

I’m just curious — The Paradigm Symposium was held last weekend in Minneapolis, featuring such remarkable stars of the wacky contingent as Erich von Däniken, Giorgio Tsoukalos, and George Noory. This is the conference I was invited to attend, but didn’t bother.

For such a glitzily publicized event and a large collection of weird “stars”, though, there isn’t much appearing on the web about it. Maybe everyone who attended was sworn to secrecy as they left, or the Men in Black showed up and wiped all their memories.

Anyway, if you were there and would care to submit a guest post, I’d probably put it up here.

I’ve been told that Eve Siebert attended, and also tweeted about it. Surprise, surprise, the speakers didn’t understand evolution.

Comments

The book would cost you more. I’d settle for the $5 if I were you. Are you trying to demonstrate how a real scientist gambles? If so, I’ll bet against you more often.

When did I ever say I was an explorer? I thought you said you’d bet $5 I’d never left my home state for over two months my entire life. There was no quote hailing back to some other post or comment. I told you exactly what you were betting on: where I had lived out of state for more thn two months.

Wait a minute… this is just another one of those diversionary posts, isn’t it? This is just a silly attempt by you to welsh on your bet, isn’t it…?

I have given very consistent answers. And when people queried me on them, I gave the very same answer

The very same non-answers. For example, how long have been agnostic, 2 years or 15 years. It is unclear from you evasions which it is. Failure to say a simple one or the other is a form of lying, and you know that. Which is why you are nothing but a liar and bullshitter.

You intentionally are vague and leave wiggle room, never fully committing to anything so you can justify back tracking and scolding people for misreading you. Honest people state their case and make it, you do not. You argue and constantly shift your case based on how the tide is turning. You try to avoid ‘losing’ so much you don’t say anything. Your style of dialogue is intentionally and painfully protean, which is why people are frustrated with talking to you.

People, people, people. He said he’d supply evidence, and I’m sure he’ll do so just as soon as Jesus gets back.

Scotty:

But I have read that there is absolutely no DNA linkage between the individual fossilized stages representing the ascendency of man from lowest order of primate …

Now see, there was a chance to supply evidence, by saying where you’d read that. Instead, we get a Romney, with you just taking what you read on faith, and you expecting us to trust you. Do you know enough about DNA to realize that we can’t yet tell much about what codes for what? We certainly can’t look at DNA and say that a certain section was used by Australopithecus (damn, misspelled one letter) to look a certain way. We can, at best say that us and chimps differ in certain ways. We cannot dig up fossil DNA and read it like Jurassic Park.

But no, you read some goober, and trust that goofy information, and you do no work nor any research, you just take it in trust. Well, we don’t trust you. We want evidence.

For instance: What evidence do you have that the Book of Exodus is not a complete fabrication?

By the way, it isn’t personal that we don’t trust you, we don’t really trust anybody without evidence. The insults and shit, on the other hand, that’s personal, just for you, and well-deserved.

The very same non-answers. For example, how long have been agnostic, 2 years or 15 years. It is unclear from you evasions which it is. Failure to say a simple one or the other is a form of lying, and you know that. Which is why you are nothing but a liar and bullshitter.

By your standard you just set forth in this quote, you have declared yourself a liar. I have asked you at least a dozen time to give me your credentials and what field you work in science.

You have evaded, ignored and failed to either say one way or the other.

You intentionally are vague and leave wiggle room, never fully committing to anything so you can justify back tracking and scolding people for misreading you. Honest people state their case and make it, you do not. You argue and constantly shift your case based on how the tide is turning. You try to avoid ‘losing’ so much you don’t say anything. Your style of dialogue is intentionally and painfully protean, which is why people are frustrated with talking to you.

Or, in other words: Obvious troll is obvious.

The amount of substanceless bluster and bobbing around that scotty has done in just this one thread is simply remarkable.

By your standard you just set forth in this quote, you have declared yourself a liar.

Evidence required, not just your OPINION. Your unevidenced OPINION is *POOF* dismissed as fuckwittery. And my business card says Sr. Scientist. Trump that liar and bullshitter. My field is irrelevant to my ability to tell you what is and isn’t scientific…and you know that.

But I have read that there is absolutely no DNA linkage between the individual fossilized stages representing the ascendency of man from lowest order of primate (would that be austioppithicus [SP]?) to modern man… *later*…I didn’t bring up anything about DNA.

Fuck it, I’m not wasting my time with such a broken play-thing. You are not worth it.

Nerd is not the one making extraordinary claims. Or supporting extraordinary claims. Or expecting anyone to take those extraordinary claims on faith with no evidence or citations. You are. Not Nerd. Were Nerd of Redhead making extraordinary claims, we would be asking him for citations and evidence.

Were Nerd of Redhead making extraordinary claims, we would be asking him for citations and evidence.

And I would either have to supply them if I were a person of honesty and integrity, or shut the fuck up. If I kept making claims I, like you, could be accused of being a liar and bullshitter. What is your excuse for not shutting the fuck up?

No no no no no he is not a troll. He’s a trickster, an old style fast talker. Imagine him in the rapid fire tone of James Woods or a cartoon Used Car Salesman. That’s what he’s doing.

You and all your smarts. Look at you. Your mama must be proud.

What you have not factored in is the fact that all of you are talking to ONE guy. I’m talking to… how many…? All at once. The rapid fire ain’t nuthin’ but me trying to keep up.

And while you may all win the Science Guy Brownie Points, you lose on the moxie. You’re just thuggish middle schoolers admittedly trying to save face for your lurkers. You lie for your lurkers. You obfuscate for your lurkers. You put on the dog and pony extravaganza for your lurkers.

But, as I have said before, you lose major points for being dipshits in the “Science is cool for everybody” category. If this is the scientific community’s PR campaign, they’d better fire their ad agency and start shopping it around.

All you really do here is establish my charge that the scientific community is filled with people who have no idea how the common person perceives them. You artful at the insult and toss out a damned impressive twist on every variation of the word “fuck” you can fit into a pronoun. But your draw to those who might want to know more… for shit.

to be fair he usually has an audience self selected for wanting to believe. Hell at his conference he could probably just babble inanely and have it be eaten up. He doesn’t get to exploit the Fox effect here.

Seriously? Dipshits like you who keep insisting i shut up, but have offered up nothing but blowhard.

But, hey, here’s my hand – no, not in marriage (not that there’s anything wrong with that) – but as a gesture toward a newfound paradigm between us, Nerd. You stop being a dickhead, and I’ll see what I can do to offer you more of what you need from me?

You intentionally are vague and leave wiggle room, never fully committing to anything so you can justify back tracking and scolding people for misreading you. Honest people state their case and make it, you do not. You argue and constantly shift your case based on how the tide is turning. You try to avoid ‘losing’ so much you don’t say anything.

Woo_Monster,

I suggest you focus less on keeping up and more on the quality of your comments.

I will supply as much evidence as I can. But I was hoping to get some answers, too. Or at least some shared information. I don’t understand the purpose for degradation of character when you (general for folks here on this thread) think you’ve stumbled upon something.

Most of you know I haven’t lied about anything, but its a great show if you continually take me to task for your lurkers. That’s more dishonest than anything I’ve ever said.

As for what appears to be discrepancies to you, just ask. But damnit, then READ the response! I have given no one any reason to not take me at my word. Just because you disagree with me doesn’t mean I am lying about something.

What you have not factored in is the fact that all of you are talking to ONE guy. I’m talking to… how many…? All at once.

You know why? It’s because you’ve made a lot of claims, and not backed up any, or almost any, whichever.

This is the always the way with you bullshitting pseudoscientific woomeisters, you come in with BS, you get called on it by all of the people who don’t like the lies, then you whine that you have so many people writing that you can hardly answer.

No, you’re getting a lot of responses because you don’t answer anything that you should, you feckless fraud. To be sure, you hardly know anything about discovery and proper evidence, but unfortunately you’ve chosen a territory where you have the obligation to know and to provide evidence. Ignoramus being asked for what you don’t understand, of course, but you’re still required to have some evidence for your claims. It just never occurred to you that it was important, instead of the adman glib made-up tripe that has gotten you through too much of your life.

It’s the absolute lack of any proper response from you that keeps people asking, and it was clear that you weren’t about to provide any proper response from the beginning. I’m not sure why such an ignoramus manages to get this much attention even so, but the nothing you’ve provided thus far hardly warrants the whiny complaint that you’re being hounded for a proper reply at any time.

What evidence do you want from me? Evidence that we were visited by aliens in our primordial past? There is none. We all know this.

Obviously, WE do not as some of us write fucking books promoting it. Hell even if you don’t know but did when you wrote your damn book you’re basically now admitting to knowingly exploiting bullshit. Really the only question is when, if ever, you started consciously being a bullshitter rather than just mistaken.

What evidence do you want from me? Evidence that we were visited by aliens in our primordial past? There is none. We all know this.

Then why do you claim that archaeologists (and other scientists) should take the idea seriously and devote time and money to investigating it? Then why do you write an entire book claiming that not only are there ancient aliens, but they have bred with humans? Then why do you claim that a particular sculpture of a turtle is different enough that it could be considered evidence?

I really don’t get your understanding of the term “tone”, fuckwit.
***

I greatly disdain bullshitters who put liars for jeebus ancient aliens in front of an audience. People who make money of peoples’ gullibility can fuck off.

I don’t think your woo is *as* harmful as some of the other types of woo, such as alt. med, faith healing, racial conspiracies*, or fundamentalist religion to name a few, but it is still mind-numbingly stupid. It is stupid because it is an outlandish, extraordinary claim, for which there is no evidence. Supporting AA-ers promotes irrational thinking and it is dishonest.

What evidence do you want from me? Evidence that we were visited by aliens in our primordial past? There is none. We all know this.

Evidence that these ancient alien theorists should be taken seriously, which btw, is evidence you said you were going to provide. Evidence for your claim that the Hebrews lived in Egypt and weren’t slaves.

No, unless your “proper response” is lies, bullshit, and evasions. The true proper response is the evidence to back up your ideas. Which you avoid like the plague, will tells all of us here and the lurkers, that you are a liar and bullshitter.

All you really do here is establish my charge that the scientific community is filled with people who have no idea how the common person perceives them. You artful at the insult and toss out a damned impressive twist on every variation of the word “fuck” you can fit into a pronoun.

I’m not a fucking scientist (or a non-fucking scientist). You could say I’m a “common person,” but that hasn’t stopped me from knowing since you arrived that you’re full of shit. It seems credentials aren’t necessary for that.

It’s kind of funny (and sad) that you seem to think you’re speaking to the scientific establishment. I guess it would be even funnier (but also even more sad) if all your bullshit here was published in a peer-reviewed journal, but that is not happening. This is a blog.

Then why do you claim that archaeologists (and other scientists) should take the idea seriously and devote time and money to investigating it?

For the same reason we devote any time to something for which we don’t have sufficient evidence. Perhaps some of these question are in the “it doesn’t matter” category for scientists. But there are good people who say there is more to these things than just silly ideas.

And no one is saying anyone should drop their busy work to devote time to something they have no desire to support. But i know of some scientists who might be happy to examine the theories or notions, but they fear repercussion form their peers… much like this thread illustrates.

Don’t take it seriously. But devote maybe a day or two a year to have a look without preconceived disregard.

Do I think any evidence exists? No. Not that we know of. But is that conclusive proof for all time that it will never be forthcoming? Your answer can only be “yes” if you’ve already made up your mind.

Same goes the AA-ers. They need to approach this fully prepared to have their notions dashed to pieces.

Then why do you write an entire book claiming that not only are there ancient aliens, but they have bred with humans?

But you see, the entire book isn’t about that. That was one of the alternatives offered up in the intro, and in a section later in the book. The bulk of the book is about Hebrew religious mythology. If you’d like, I’ll send you a book and you can see for yourself. The entire book was about exploring the Hebrew Nephilim mythology.

Then why do you claim that a particular sculpture of a turtle is different enough that it could be considered evidence?

I don’t personally claim it means anything. But I know that this is one of the questions posed. If we are to look to archaeology, in part, for answers and evidence, what do you do when that evidence seems to contradict itself?

I have asked you at least a dozen time to give me your credentials and what field you work in science.

And I have told you half a dozen times that it doesn’t matter what anybody’s credential are. In this blog, we don’t go by authority, we go by argument and evidence.

But, to make you happy: I am the most interesting primate on the planet. The pope comes to me for confession. I am the main editor of Wikipedia. I have a doctorate in Russian pneumatics. I am the secret controller of NASA … see, it’s the internet, I can say anything, just like you can write yourself a bio that would make Hugh Hefner a bit squicky.

Plus, asking someone again and again for personal information, after they have declined to answer is very rude. As is declining to answer when someone has asked you again and again for reasons to think that Exodus isn’t a steaming pile of sermon-fodder.

And, no, I know absolutely nothing about DNA, well, except that I have it. I think. Right…? That’s why I posed my question to you (all) about what I had read.

And it would have been much better to give the source so we could read the original. But given the level of your reading, why would we even bother to take such a question seriously, why would we think you could understand a response, and why the fuck are you asking strangers on the internet to do your homework for you?

What you have not factored in is the fact that all of you are talking to ONE guy. I’m talking to… how many…? All at once. The rapid fire ain’t nuthin’ but me trying to keep up.

Yeah, thanks, dickweed, for yet another insult to our intelligences. We know you are on your own here, and you have reminded us of that before, and we have done this little dance with other trolls before. We know we’ve got you swarmed, and we know you haven’t answered ANYBODY at any useful level.

But keep playing the martyr card, and keep telling us we’re stupid. That’s really gonna help.

You’re just thuggish middle schoolers admittedly trying to save face for your lurkers. You lie for your lurkers. You obfuscate for your lurkers. You put on the dog and pony extravaganza for your lurkers.

You’ve really fixated on the lurkers. Is that somehow like God for you? You know, the hidden observer making judgement thing? Is that why it resonates for you?

Hey, lurkers! Your father was a hamster and your mother smells of elderberries! Unlurk, you useless gits, or go away.

If this is the scientific community’s PR campaign, they’d better fire their ad agency and start shopping it around.

No, just the comment section of a biology blog. Are you imagining some shadow conspiracy or something?

All you really do here is establish my charge that the scientific community is filled with people who have no idea how the common person perceives them.

This isn’t really “the scientific community”, and I am a fat white guy in the Ozarks, about as common as the drunks next door. And the really common folk have made it quite clear how they perceive science, thanks—again, we aren’t stupid, we’ve got internet access, and we are communicating with you.

You artful at the insult and toss out a damned impressive twist on every variation of the word “fuck” you can fit into a pronoun.

Yeah, I do love the writing here.

But your draw to those who might want to know more… for shit.

Actually, we don’t do it just for them—that’s your obsession—and we do get a lot of former lurkers who come in to say they have learned a lot. I know I have learned a lot.

Just because you want us to explain things to you in the way you like, instead of doing your own studying and thinking, you get all shirty. It’s a damn popular blog, in case you haven’t noticed.

I’m not about to make a comprehensive list of your pathetic BS, but there’s the DNA bit, the claims about cultural artifacts not fitting in (at least perhaps not) the cultural context, the claim that science is religion (here? Probably, but don’t really care, it’s part of your dishonest spiel), the claim that the ufologists are practicing in religion by dissing your junk (not here, don’t care, you need to back up any of your claims, including those you leave out here to obfuscate the issue), a host of claims about people here, which itself would constitute a considerable list (some might be considered supported by context, many not), your claim that your junk is worth considering despite the fact that it doesn’t fit with science (sure, as a psychological study in woomeisters, but that’s not what you meant), the basic claim that ancient astronauts are worthy of consideration for which I know of no good evidence whatsoever, and all claims relating to your open-mindedness and knowledge. Of the latter two, we see neither.

That’s quite enough, although I’m sure I could add a bunch if I were going to serve as your lackey paying attention to the gibberish that you spout, when you don’t even trouble to keep track of it. Not likely.

Do I think any evidence exists [for ancient aliens]? No. Not that we know of. But is that conclusive proof for all time that it will never be forthcoming? Your answer can only be “yes” if you’ve already made up your mind.

Oh no, not the “can’t prove that it didn’t happen” line common to all pseudoscientists.

Guess what, no one’s keeping anyone from looking for evidence for ancient astronauts, ID, or herbal remedies. And we actually expect scientists who might have found something truly strange to at least consider the possibility of aliens, since they’re a real possibility. WTF do you think SETI’s about anyhow?

No, you don’t study anything lacking in evidence at the present. You find evidence, probably while looking for something else (because who’s going to waste time chasing for what has at present no evidence?), then you study. We’ll study UFOs when there’s genuine evidence, and intelligent design as well when there’s genuine evidence.

Someone says something stupid, so scientists have to go chase after that. That’s the demand of charlatans such as yourself. No, come up with evidence that there’s something to study–even if it might not turn out to have alien origins–and then it’ll be studied.

If only you knew something about real discovery, rather than what you merely imagine it to be about…

For the same reason we devote any time to something for which we don’t have sufficient evidence.

If one really, really believes something, but doesn’t have sufficient evidence, then the honest and responsible course of action is to go LOOK for the evidence oneself, and PRESENT that evidence until it becomes sufficient to convince the scientific consensus.

That is what Newton did. That is what Galileo did. That is what Einstein did.

And if what evidence one has is not sufficient to convince one’s skeptics, then one does NOT wank about it, complain about it, or snark about it. One goes back and looks for MORE evidence.

That is what Wegener did. That is what Margulis did. That is what Marshall did.

It’s called “taking personal responsibility”. It doesn’t just apply to taxes and social programs.

Are you saying that I misread you? I thought your tone was quite civil. If I was wrong, I will withdraw my statement, and you can be as civil or uncivil as you’d like.

As for the rest of what you said, we are on similar pages, for I too hold great disdains for certain things, oner of them is needing to be uncivil for the sake of putting on a dog and pony show for lurkers.

As for Fuckewits, fuckwits are fuckwits. Period. There’s plenty of those in the AA and Scientific fields to cancel each other out. And, by the by, you possess scientific fact and still be a fuckwit.

Do I think any evidence exists [for ancient aliens]? No. Not that we know of. But is that conclusive proof for all time that it will never be forthcoming?

If scientific resources were infinite, and the time available to search for evidence infinite, then there are all sorts of interesting questions that we could go looking for the answers for.

If our own minds and lives were infinite, then there are all sorts of interesting things we can spend time and energy thinking about.

But scientific resources are NOT infinite, nor are individual intellectual resources. Hard choices must be made on what to spend these limited resources on. And there are many more pressing and more useful things to spend those resources on than something for which there is absolutely no evidence, in the faint hope that some time, some place, the evidence will some day be forthcoming.

And if someone should think otherwise, then the onus is on that person to pay the piper, and fork over the intellectual, temporal, and financial resources to go snipe hunting.

Wow. I had no idea this thread was still going on. I wish I had paid attention to for longer but now I am impossibly far behind. Lately I have, much to my sadness, not seen many threads where a decent crackpot type has come by and stuck around for a bit. I miss the creationists and other similarly minded people that would come here and chat for a while, it brought some joy into my life to see them flail and sometimes I even learned something reading through the comments. It does not seem to happen as often any longer.

Screw it, I am going to go back and find the start of this and in the very least, skim the posts and see if it brings my happiness levels back up.

Scotty, you’ve been so dishonest I’m going to punish you by quoting you more.

That humanity experienced an interruption in its ancient past is incontrovertible in my mind. The question of extra-terrestrial interference in our genetics and bloodline is most certainly a reality, though something that will be debated in greater halls of academia and bastions of thinking far beyond my scope and attainment.

[….]
Scott Alan Roberts
August 30, 2011

The Rise and Fall of the NEPHILIM:The Untold Story of Fallen Angels, Giants on the Earth, and Their Extraterrestrial Origins, Preface.

It is my belief that there exist out there beings much greater than ourselve—perhaps not greater in reason and compassion, but greater in the sense that they hold a power that was strong enough to create us, and then strong enough to manipulate our genetics and bloodlines. It is my belief that there is a great, universal spirituality that resembles nothing like that which we have been taught or have conceived in our wildest fictions.

The Nephilim rose to dominance on the earth as the children of a mixed race of superior beings and human women. They, as all things do, degraded and became corrupt, but their decay and decadence were on as grandiose a scheme as their unnatural origins. They wreaked havoc and tragedy and catastrophic corruption among humankind. Then they fell in the great judgment imposed by the king of all that exists, only to return in the form of pure evil.

The Rise and Fall of the NEPHILIM:The Untold Story of Fallen Angels, Giants on the Earth, and Their Extraterrestrial Origins

first approximation,
You can hang me on these words, then, too. This is from the new book releasing in February. It’s a bit out-of-context here, as is the passage you lifted from Nephilim, but it demonstrates where I have taken this whole notion since the writing of the first book. This hasn’t gone through final edits, but here is a section from chapter four where I addressed the psychology behind why people believe some of these things. I obviously can’t post the other 80% of the chapter, as the book isn’t yet in print, but here is a look…

* * *

…in contrast to German psychoanalyst Karen Horney, a contemporary of both Freud and Adler, who pushed her idea that humans don’t strive for superiority, they strive for a self image built out of idealism. People don’t believe their real self is acceptable, so, out of necessity and psychological survival, we create – out of whole cloth – an idolized self, the thing we think we should be.3

Now, put that in your kit bag and walk it over here to see how it fits into the greater picture:

The entire notion of paleo-contact may be simply explained as that we’ve devised from our own imaginations. As we have created religions of whole cloth, constructed on the shifting foundation of spiritual experience, we have done the very same thing with the notion of extraterrestrial races that live and operate behind the scenes of humanity. In religion, there are things we hail to as evidences, yet with no solid, empirical facts to back the claims other than a history rife nothing more than myth building within myth building layered upon myth building.

It is clear that the human psyche is comprised of both the Freudian and Adlerian theories of primary expressions of the psyche – we humans have both the need to look to our pasts to determine where we came from, and the need to allow our future aspirations to pull us forward. And out of both, we create our present realities and live within the frameworks we compose for ourselves.

Does this, then, bring to utter discredit the theory of alien interaction with human beings? Does it dismiss completely the notion that there are races of extraterrestrial (ETs), interterrestrial (ITs), ultraterrestrial (UTs) dwelling among us and influencing activity on this planet? Not necessarily. Just as I cannot dismiss the existence of a God or the veracity of ancient religions on the simple notion that they are unquantifiable by the scientific method, I cannot dismiss the possibility that we have been visited by beings outside the realm of our sciences or understanding.

And this is where any form of intelligent discourse on these matters collide, as opposing trains approaching on the same track.

The proofs and evidences that exist to substantiate a factual claim that alien races exist, visit and operate on this planet, are as evasive as the proofs and evidences required to prove the existence of god, or the existence of ghosts of dead people materializing at midnight on the third full moon of every year.

In short, there is no solid proof beyond highly subjective personal experience and anecdotal evidence, which is too subjective to be evidence at all. But has that lack of measurable quantifiability prevented humanity from its historical, perpetual worship of a god, gods and other forms of divinities? Not in the least. As with Religion, ancient and modern alien contact theory has its experiencers, such as the one mentioned in the opening of the introduction of this book, but they become the promulgators of personal, individual contact and intercourse (not limited to a sexual understanding). Armed with only their own words as a measure, they proclaim that they have seen the unseen, spoken with the invisible and learned the secret knowledges not known to others. These types are the founders of religious thought within the alien religion – and I don’t say this to cast any sort of dispersion on their claims, because – hey – it’s their experience, more power to ’em. I merely make the comparison between the spread of ancient religion and the evolution of religious thought within the alien subculture.

Just as Elil became Elohim, and Enki/Ea became Jehovah, so the progression of alien esoterica has developed into its current state. And the evangelists of the theory are as convinced in their perceptions and evidences as are the professors and theologians in different trains of religious thought, who many times are found to overlap the two fields. Why and how do they do that? Because the two fields are one-in-same; they are both outward expressions of inner desires; projections of we want the world to be. Both religion and alienist trains of thinking appeal to the spiritual composition of the human psyche, those parts of the individual psyche that need something to answer the greater questions of what lay beyond the explorable sciences.

It is clear that the human psyche is comprised of both the Freudian and Adlerian theories of primary expressions of the psyche – scottyroberts

No it isn’t. Freudian psychoanalysis (I know less of Adler) is more or less pure pseudoscience, and in the USA (it’s not really taken seriously anywhere else these days), has become a large-scale scam, although it must be admitted it only exploits the well-off. There’s no evidence I know of for the major tenets of Freudian psychology, no evidence I know of (beyond anecdote) that psychoanalysis is ever beneficial, and some that it is harmful.

Assuming the extract you give from your new book is an accurate reflection of the contents, what changed your mind? In 2011 you were thought it had been proved that aliens not only visited the earth, but interbred with humans. Now you admit there’s no good evidence for these claims.

Assuming the extract you give from your new book is an accurate reflection of the contents, what changed your mind? In 2011 you were thought it had been proved that aliens not only visited the earth, but interbred with humans. Now you admit there’s no good evidence for these claims.

As strange as this may sound, Nick, it is all hinged to my view of God, and how dramatically that has changed. Comparative studies aren’t a new thing to me, we simply filtered it through our theology when I was younger, as opposed to viewing it for what it is.

In a weird way, these books have been very personal for me, in that they are a bit of presenting ideas that have morphed since I had the opportunity to publish them. Its as if the “forced” writing of a book contract has made me put these things onto paper, and I have had to really think through what I believed.

Even Nephilim is not as straight forward “ancient alien” as some of the passages might appear. I was taken to task by ancient alienists out there for slamming their theories, too.

I assert that there is no good evidence. But – and this might get you wrankled with me again – I am not closed to the notion. If there is tangible evidence to find, I wish I could be a part of finding it, but that I would have to leave to those who dedicate their lives to finding this stuff.

You point out that the AA claims are built on the framework of myth, that the adherents treat it like theology, that there’s no evidence… and then refuse to go the whole hog.

You outright characterize their field as the result of wishful thinking, but then try to keep a door open for their factual claims. Why?

You provide no argument for this besides “we need to beliiiiiiieve” (sure, that will go well in a forum of atheists) and “unfalsifiable claims can’t be proven to be wrong, so they could always be right” (sure, and how do we distinguish one unfalsifiable claim from another? Or are all equally true and dragons will be real if I wish hard enough?).

You outright characterize their field as the result of wishful thinking, but then try to keep a door open for their factual claims. Why?

I personally think its ok to keep that door open – as long as there is responsible research on the part of the adherents as opposed to simply wishful thinking.

Its a notion. But those steeped in the research will claim they have “evidences” that ought to be considered. I say to them: “show me the money.” I want to see what they’ve got beyond simply a claim.

I will admit that this stuff certainly is an outcome of “childhood fantasies,” on my part. Less than my religious faith was for me, but more than mere scifi/fantasy, this stuff intrigues me. Should I just throw out the fun and excitement of the exploring the possibilities?

Should I just throw out the fun and excitement of the exploring the possibilities? – scottyroberts

What you do with your time is your own affair; but stop pretending anyone else – particularly scientists – has any reason whatsoever to do likewise, or is being closed-minded, dogmatic or “religious” when they dismiss all this stuff as the pointless pseudo-scholarly wankery it is.

What you do with your time is your own affair; but stop pretending anyone else – particularly scientists – has any reason whatsoever to do likewise, or is being closed-minded, dogmatic or “religious” when they dismiss all this stuff as the pointless pseudo-scholarly wankery it is.

I think it was you who mentioned waaaaaay back that scientists have personal beliefs that they do not bring ionto their research. That, of course, is a no-brainer.

Can I ask you… is there anything that might be categorized as “woo” that you, personally, find intriguing?

I am so glad I don’t work for you. You have been misattributing comments the entire time you have been here. Do you do this in meetings at work? Do you have any idea how annoying it is to have my (or other’s) work attributed to someone else? Look at #96 & #97 on this page of comments and tell me what is wrong, please?

I think that I outgrew woo at about age 12 or 13. I do read science fiction and fantasy but I recognize that it really is fiction. Have for many decades, in fact.